Moore v Moore [2016] EWHC 2202 (Ch) (19 August 2016)

Moore v Moore [2016] EWHC 2202 (Ch) (19 August 2016)

The court found that Roger Moore made repeated and clear promises to Stephen Moore that he would inherit Roger's share of the farm and partnership assets, that Stephen relied on those promises to his detriment by devoting his life and career to the farm on modest terms, and that it would be unconscionable for Roger (or his estate) to resile from those promises. Accordingly, Stephen is entitled to an equity in Roger's share, to be satisfied by appropriate orders.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 2202 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant/part 20 Defendant: Roger Moore (by his Litigation Friend, Pamela Moore); First Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Stephen Moore; Second Defendant: Till Valley Contracting Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Proprietary Estoppel/partnership Dispute / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed in part; proprietary estoppel established in favour of Stephen Moore; partnership to be dissolved as agreed.
Legal Topics
Proprietary Estoppel, Equitable Remedies, Partnership Dissolution, Testamentary Promises
Equity Property Law Partnership Law Proprietary Estoppel Equitable Remedies Partnership Dissolution Testamentary Promises

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Roger Moore (by his Litigation Friend, Pamela Moore)

Claimant/part 20 Defendant

Stephen Moore

First Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Till Valley Contracting Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Proprietary Estoppel/partnership Dispute / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Roger Moore made clear promises to Stephen Moore that he would inherit Roger's share of the farm and partnership assets
  2. 2 Whether Stephen Moore relied on those promises to his detriment
  3. 3 Whether it would be unconscionable for Roger Moore to resile from those promises

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that Roger Moore made repeated and clear promises to Stephen Moore that he would inherit Roger's share of the farm and partnership assets, that Stephen relied on those promises to his detriment by devoting his life and career to the farm on modest terms, and that it would be unconscionable for Roger (or his estate) to resile from those promises. Accordingly, Stephen is entitled to an equity in Roger's share, to be satisfied by appropriate orders.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part; proprietary estoppel established in favour of Stephen Moore; partnership to be dissolved as agreed.

Orders

  • Stephen Moore is entitled to an equity in Roger Moore's share of the farm and partnership assets, to be satisfied by appropriate orders (details to be determined).
  • The partnership between Roger Moore, Stephen Moore, and Till Valley Contracting Limited is to be dissolved.